Whos the toughest?

[Talker]

Originally Posted by citybert

If the pain is true then it has to be nadal. you could be mentally tougher than your opponent and still lose the point. Just happens.

There are players less skilled that may be tougher than the top players, hard to tell when the skill level is lower.

[NEW_BORN]

Staying confident after a heart-breaking loss - Fed
Staying upbeat, doesn't get down on himself in a match - Nadal
Staying focused, taking massive risks when chips are down - The Djok

[FormerNadalFan]

I used to think Nadal topped the charts on metal toughness, but the tactical stuff (nice way of saying BS gamesmanship) he's been pulling over the last couple of years tells me that he's lost that mental edge.

Right now, I'd say that the Djoker is winning in this category.

[Mustard]

Originally Posted by rofl_copter3

How is this a better example than all of Djokers match points down coming back to win? I'm not saying one guy is tougher than the other, but I fail to see how your example proves your arguement.

Because 2011-2013 Djokovic is a lot more experienced than 2005-2006 Nadal. Before 2011, Djokovic was considered to be very suspect in the mental toughness stakes, very inconsistent due to physical ailments.

Originally Posted by Tennis_Hands

Yeah.

Because turning the match on the surface, that suits your game the most, and, in the case against Federer, having a favourable match-up against your opponent, shows exactly that.

Do you know how boring your snide comments have gotten?

Have you heard of hindsight? You're using it. Don't do it. Nadal was an 18 year old who had never won a major when he beat Coria in the 2005 Rome final. At the time of the 2006 Rome final, Federer had 7 majors to Nadal's 1, and it was only their third match on a clay-court.

[YouCantBeSerious]

Originally Posted by The-Champ

Yeah, the humongous advantage the ridiculously talented Federer, with his plan A, B, C and D over the one-dimensional no-talent Nadal.

This made me spill my milk and I wasn't even drinking milk.

[YouCantBeSerious]

Originally Posted by NEW_BORN

Staying confident after a heart-breaking loss - Fed
Staying upbeat, doesn't get down on himself in a match - Nadal
Staying focused, taking massive risks when chips are down - The Djok

Staying hungry for haggis and a nice lager after an XBox game - Muzza.

[Mustard]

Originally Posted by NEW_BORN

Staying confident after a heart-breaking loss - Fed
Staying upbeat, doesn't get down on himself in a match - Nadal
Staying focused, taking massive risks when chips are down - The Djok

Yes, you've nailed it

[Fiji]

Originally Posted by Mustard

Before 2011, Djokovic was considered to be very suspect in the mental toughness stakes, very inconsistent due to physical ailments.

What a wonderful invention the Cvac is!

[doobiedoodoo]

Nadal for sure. Djokovic close second.

[TheFifthSet]

Originally Posted by Tennis_Hands

Yeah.

Because turning the match on the surface, that suits your game the most, and, in the case against Federer, having a favourable match-up against your opponent, shows exactly that.

I don't get the arrogance. Even if you disagree with him, whats so utterly incomprehensible about thinking nadal is the toughest mentally?

Everybody gets b!tchy of every little thing over here.

[Mighty Matteo]

I think people underestimate federer's mental toughness because he does not show as much emotion on court as the other players. Certainly his consistency in the majors is reflective of his consistent attitude and mental toughness. The guy does not get as discouraged after his losses. He is the best front runner of the top 4, while Nadal is certainly the best at coming from behind in a match. Nadal is very tenacious and never gives up, however he struggles with nerves more than federer and djokovic and does not start as well in matches. Federer is probably the best at maintaining a lead and closing out matches so in my mind he is the most mental tough, which is reflected by his results. my order is
1. Federer
2. Nadal
3. Djokovic
4. Murray

[Tennis_Hands]

Originally Posted by Mustard

Do you know how boring your snide comments have gotten? .

I am sure, that they seem boring/snide to you, because you are one unbiased and fair poster.

Originally Posted by Mustard

Have you heard of hindsight? You're using it. Don't do it. Nadal was an 18 year old who had never won a major when he beat Coria in the 2005 Rome final. At the time of the 2006 Rome final, Federer had 7 majors to Nadal's 1, and it was only their third match on a clay-court.

In 2003 Nadal beat the reigning champion of RG Alert Costa at the tournament in Monte Carlo and 1998 RG champion Carlos Moya in Hamburg. By the matches you mention, he was an established claycourt player (reflected by his claycourt record, ranking and place in the Spanish Davis Cup team).

So, I am not using a hindsight, and you, trying to show how much of a non-factor Nadal was on clay, just to boost his image as a mental giant in those particular instances, is laughable.

I particularly enjoyed your "At the time of the 2006 Rome final, Federer had 7 majors to Nadal's 1" and " it was only their third match on a clay-court", having in mind, that none of those 7 Majors was on clay, Federer had won none of their matches on clay and Nadal was firmly established clay-court force by then. Forget the fact, that the unfavourable match-up was already evident (leading the H2H) .

All in all, the way you use your "knowledge", to support your bias, is comical.

[Tennis_Hands]

Originally Posted by TheFifthSet

I don't get the arrogance. Even if you disagree with him, whats so utterly incomprehensible about thinking nadal is the toughest mentally?

Everybody gets b!tchy of every little thing over here.

I disagree with the examples, he choose, to illustrate his point.

I also do not see, how an absolutely valid remark can be taken for arrogance.

FYIF. I think that anyone, who has managed to get to the top and stay there, is as tough as someone can be. Nadal included.

[Flash O'Groove]

Originally Posted by Tennis_Hands

I disagree with the examples, he choose, to illustrate his point.

I also do not see, how an absolutely valid remark can be taken for arrogance.

FYIF. I think that anyone, who has managed to get to the top and stay there, is as tough as someone can be. Nadal included.

Great. And let's not forget that mental fortitude is also tied with overall abilities. Nadal, Nole and Fed all have more chance to succeed in the shot they choose to hit than Wawrinka like players.

[Tropikal_Knights]

It seems that Nole has the ability to raise his game on the biggest points...............

Fed comes up with outrageous winners when he is match point down but also has the tendency to frame a few on big points or dump it in the net.....

Nadal runs harder and faster when he is matchpoint down or breakpoints down......but the moment a challenger in Nole came on the scene he broke.........

[xan]

Originally Posted by Tennis_Hands

All in all, the way you use your "knowledge", to support your bias, is comical.

inclined to agree.

[Mustard]

Show me somebody who's unbiased, whatever that means, and I'll show you a liar. People have their favourites or interests, so will be tinged by bias to some extent.

[Clarky21]

Originally Posted by Tennis_Hands

I am sure, that they seem boring/snide to you, because you are one unbiased and fair poster.






In 2003 Nadal beat the reigning champion of RG Alert Costa at the tournament in Monte Carlo and 1998 RG champion Carlos Moya in Hamburg. By the matches you mention, he was an established claycourt player (reflected by his claycourt record, ranking and place in the Spanish Davis Cup team).

So, I am not using a hindsight, and you, trying to show how much of a non-factor Nadal was on clay, just to boost his image as a mental giant in those particular instances, is laughable.

I particularly enjoyed your "At the time of the 2006 Rome final, Federer had 7 majors to Nadal's 1" and " it was only their third match on a clay-court", having in mind, that none of those 7 Majors was on clay, Federer had won none of their matches on clay and Nadal was firmly established clay-court force by then. Forget the fact, that the unfavourable match-up was already evident (leading the H2H) .

All in all, the way you use your "knowledge", to support your bias, is comical.

And you're not biased? You're one of the most biased, Nadal hating posters on this forum. Self-awareness is certainly not one of your attributes.

[tennisaddict]

As much as i hate to admit it, Djokovic is by and far the clutch player by miles as he has shown since USO 2010. The number of matches he has won after being match point down or within a point or two of losing are too many to count.

Nadal has not gotten himself into such situations often.

Federer has some 9 losses including 4 at majors losing matches after holding match points.

So , on this count , it is hands down Djokovic.

[xan]

Originally Posted by Clarky21

And you're not biased? You're one of the most biased, Nadal hating posters on this forum. Self-awareness is certainly not one of your attributes.

you are one to talk.